Agriculture: Costs and Regulation

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs' current strategy to achieve its targets of reducing farming costs by 25 per cent by 2010; and
	Whether as part of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs' simplification plan to reduce its administration costs an assessment will be made of whether United Kingdom farmers have been disadvantaged by over-implementation of regulations compared with other European Union member states.

Lord Rooker: Defra does not have a target to reduce total costs to farmers by 25 per cent. However, we do have a commitment to reduce administrative burdens by 25 per cent by 2010.
	Lord Davidson's review on the implementation of EU legislation, published on 28 November 2006, found that the unnecessary over-implementation of EU legislation may not be as widespread in the UK as is sometimes claimed. It is sometimes beneficial for the UK economy to set or maintain regulatory standards that exceed the minimum requirements of European legislation.
	However, the review did conclude that there were areas in the stock of legislation where regulatory burdens can be removed. The review included three Defra case studies: on waste legislation, on fisheries legislation and on the herd register for bovine animals. It makes specific recommendations for Defra in these areas. The report also includes wider recommendations to encourage the spread of best practice across departments in the implementation of EU legislation. Some of these build on Defra's existing best practice work.
	Defra's 2006 simplification plan, Maximising Outcomes, Minimising Burdens, will be published on 11 December and will be available on the Defra website at www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/regulat/requlat.asp. Copies of the plan will also be placed in the House Library. The Defra simplification plan will take forward the specific simplification proposals from Lord Davidson's review. In addition, the more generic recommendations which aim to further strengthen the implementation of EU legislation in the future will, if they are not already, be incorporated into our programme of better regulation culture change.
	The plan reports on the key findings from the cross-Whitehall exercise to measure the administrative burdens imposed by regulations, and how these burdens fall on different stakeholders. It also details simplification projects, many of which are already under way, which will ensure that Defra meets its commitment to reduce administrative burdens by 25 per cent by 2010. Reducing these burdens is just one aspect of better regulation and the plan details initiatives that will improve the way in which Defra and its delivery bodies interact with business. We are working with business stakeholders, including the National Farmers' Union, to develop these initiatives and to help to monitor our delivery of the plan as a whole.
	Defra's farm regulation and charging strategy, Partners for Success, was launched on 28 November 2005. The strategy commits the Government to improving the way in which we regulate (and enforce regulation) and to reducing bureaucracy. This will improve farmers' capacity to help to protect the environment, animal health and welfare, food safety and worker safety. It is available on the Defra website at www.defra.gov.uk/farm/policy/regulation/charge/index.htm.

Agriculture: Poultry

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, in order to prevent possible commercial disadvantage, they will reduce the £3,000 registration fee payable by United Kingdom poultry producers under the integrated pollution prevention and control regulations, bearing in mind the £700 registration fee payable by Danish poultry producers; and
	Whether they will reduce the charges that United Kingdom poultry producers are required to pay on an annual basis under the integrated pollution prevention and control regulations once they are registered under the scheme.

Lord Rooker: The integrated pollution prevention and control (IPPC) directive applies an integrated environmental approach to the regulation of industrial activities. This means that emissions to air, water (including discharges to sewer) and land, plus a range of other environmental effects, including noise and vibration, must be considered together before a permit is granted. IPPC aims to prevent emissions and waste production and, where that is not practicable, to reduce them to acceptable levels.
	The regulator must set permit conditions so as to achieve a high level of protection for the environment and human health as a whole. These conditions are based on the use of the "best available techniques", which balances the costs to the operator against the benefits to the environment and human health.
	Regulatory costs have to be met by those whose activities cause the need for them and so cannot be waived. Intensive livestock installations will be charged £3,331 for a permit application and then annual charges of £2,229 for a small installation and £2,794 for a large one. The IPPC directive applies only to poultry installations with places for more than 40,000 birds and to installations with places for more than 2,000 production pigs or 750 sows. Large units are those greater than 10 times the lower threshold—that is, those greater than 400,000 birds, 20,000 production pigs or 7,500 sows.
	On 19 May, the industry accepted an offer from the Environment Agency whereby, provided that permit applications are received evenly through the 1 November 2006 to 31 January 2007 application period, a subsistence charge of £1,471 for an existing small installation and £1,844 for an existing large one will be made to industry from August 2007 until March 2008. This represents a substantial saving to industry.
	The IPPC directive is required to be implemented in its entirety in all member states by 2007. In the UK, the farming sector is among the last to be regulated by the national transposing regulations (with the exception of new installations). Most other industrial sectors have had to apply for an IPPC permit and comply with the provisions of the IPPC regime sooner than intensive livestock.
	Some EU member states may not charge for IPPC permit applications, but may recover varying proportions of their costs from the regulated industry, while others bear the cost in general taxation. This is a political decision for each national Government. The differing practices that are in place make it difficult to make comparisons of the costs to producers across the EU.
	I met representatives of the industry recently and assured them that I would look again at what might be able to be done to reduce the costs of these regulatory requirements.

Assisted Dying

Lord Alton of Liverpool: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How they will respond to the proposal made by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists that the deliberate intervention to cause the death of a disabled infant should be made legal through the enactment of laws; and what account they are taking of the opposition of the Disability Rights Commission and disabled people's organisations such as RADAR: The Disability Rights Network.

Lord Warner: The Royal College has confirmed that it has never promoted or advocated that very premature babies should be actively euthanised and it is not calling for a change in the law to introduce euthanasia. It claims that recent media reports have misrepresented its position. We welcome this confirmation.

Care Services: Fresh Drinking Water

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether care standards require that fresh drinking water is available to care residents throughout the day and that it is offered to them regularly; and
	Whether they will take further steps to ensure that fresh water is a required element of the nutritional standards for older people in care.

Lord Warner: Regulation 16 of the Care Homes Regulations requires care homes to,
	"provide, in adequate quantities, suitable, wholesome and nutritious food which is varied and properly prepared and available at such time as may reasonably be required by service users".
	Food, in the regulations, includes drink.
	Standard 15 of the national minimum standards (NMS) for care homes for older people includes the requirements that:
	service users receive a varied, appealing, wholesome and nutritious diet, which is suited to individual assessed and recorded requirements, and that meals are taken in a congenial setting and at flexible times; andhot and cold drinks and snacks are available at all times and offered regularly.
	The review of the NMS, which the Commission for Social Care Inspection must take into account when inspecting care homes, is ongoing and will be subject to public consultation in due course. The issue of availability of drinking water to residents is being considered as part of the review.
	The Food Standards Agency (FSA) published nutrient and food-based advice for those providing food in care homes on 19 October 2006. This advice includes example menus, which include making water available at all eating occasions. Government advice is that we need to drink six to eight glasses of fluid every day. It is therefore implicit that care homes should be making water freely available throughout the day.
	The nutrient and food-based guidance for those providing residential care for older people is the first part in a series of guidance documents for United Kingdom institutions. The FSA expects to produce guidance for other institutions, including the National Health Service and prisons, in early 2007.

Child Protection: Bichard Inquiry

Baroness Harris of Richmond: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What progress has been made in ensuring the delivery of the Bichard inquiry recommendations before 2010.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Over two-thirds of the 31 recommendations from the Bichard inquiry have already been substantially delivered. Comprehensive programme management arrangements are in place to ensure delivery of the remainder through to 2010. Some of the most significant aspects of the programme, such as IMPACT, will generate improvements and benefits incrementally during this period.

Crime: Rape

Lord Campbell-Savours: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What are the conditions and circumstances in which DNA would be taken from an accuser of rape from the time of the original reporting of the rape to the period following the verdict of a jury in a rape trial.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Victims of crime may be asked to consent to provide the police with a DNA sample for elimination purposes as part of the investigation into that crime. The victim's DNA sample is not retained after the conclusion of the case and the DNA profile is not added to the National DNA Database unless the victim has given their written consent for this.

Democratic Republic of Congo: Poaching

Lord Jones of Cheltenham: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What assistance they have offered to the Government of the Democratic Republic of Congo to assist wildlife wardens to prevent poaching of wildlife.

Lord Triesman: Wildlife wardens in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) work in difficult and dangerous conditions to combat poaching. My honourable friend the then Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Jim Knight, discussed these challenges when he met wardens in Virunga and Kahuzi-Biega parks during his 2005 visit to the DRC.
	The biggest threat to wardens, and the wildlife that they are working to protect, comes from armed poachers and from the various foreign and Congolese militia groups operating in remote parts of the DRC. The UK continues to support the UN peacekeeping force, which is working with the new Congolese army to tackle the foreign armed groups. We are also supporting the reform and training of the new Congolese army by providing £3 million for basic life needs support, such as tents and water. This will help to stop Congolese soldiers and militias preying on civilians, wardens and wildlife.

EU: Turkey

Lord Judd: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is their position on the accession of Turkey to the European Union.

Lord Triesman: We believe that the accession of Turkey is of immense strategic importance to the EU. Turkey is a growing, dynamic economy, it has an educated workforce and it is a close partner on many of the global issues that matter to us most—drugs, terrorism, non-proliferation and migration. Turkey would also make a significant contribution to the EU's security capabilities and has leverage on all sides engaged in the Middle East peace process. Turkey also links Europe and the Muslim world, and accession would help to refute claims of a clash of civilisations.

Guantanamo Bay

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why they will not make an exception to the general policy of not assisting non-British nationals in the case of the former British residents held for a long time without charge or trial at Guantanamo Bay; and whether they have made an assessment of the effect that offering to accept the return of some or all of these detainees might have on the early closure of the detention centre.

Lord Triesman: It is the long-standing policy of the British Government not to offer consular assistance to non-British nationals, except in cases where a specific agreement to do so exists with another state. A recent Court of Appeal judgment in a judicial review application brought by some of the detainees at the Guantanamo Bay detention facility who were formally resident in the UK confirmed that there is no duty on my right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary, in domestic or international law, to make the formal request for release and return from Guantanamo Bay sought by those detainees. In these proceedings, the Government's assessment was that the US Government would be very likely to resist any request for the release of the claimants, and that lobbying would make it more difficult for the UK to engage with the US on wider issues of detainee policy, including our wish to see the Guantanamo Bay detention facility closed.

Health: Audiology

Lord Turnberg: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What are the most recently available waiting times for National Health Service audiology services by English regions.

Lord Warner: Waiting times for pure tone audiometry by strategic health authority are set out in the following table:
	
		
			 Audiology services by region 
			 September diagnostic return—commissioner, 15 November 2006 
			 SHA code SHA name DiagID Diagnostic name Total waiting Number waiting 13+ weeks Number waiting 26+ weeks 
			  National 6 Audiology—pure tone audiometry 127,280 82,057 58,289 
			 Q30 North-east 6 Audiology—pure tone audiometry 1,078 499 186 
			 Q31 North-west 6 Audiology—pure tone audiometry 14,028 8,186 5,120 
			 Q32 Yorkshire and the Humber 6 Audiology—pure tone audiometry 13,223 10,470 8,666 
			 Q33 East Midlands 6 Audiology—pure tone audiometry 8,879 5,603 4,126 
			 Q34 West Midlands 6 Audiology—pure tone audiometry 28,624 19,138 15,005 
			 Q35 East of England 6 Audiology—pure tone audiometry 3,888 1,642 711 
			 Q36 London 6 Audiology—pure tone audiometry 6,018 3,241 1,339 
			 Q37 South-east Coast 6 Audiology—pure tone audiometry 15,982 11,989 8,912 
			 Q38 South Central 6 Audiology—pure tone audiometry 11,289 5,945 3,535 
			 Q39 South-west 6 Audiology—pure tone audiometry 24,270 15,343 10,689 
			 Source: DM01

Health: Audiology

Lord Turnberg: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What advice the Department of Health has sought from the professional bodies representing United Kingdom audiologists in formulating their national audiology plan.

Lord Warner: Our intention is to publish the action plan early in 2007. It is clearly essential that it should be informed by the views of the broad range of stakeholders, including the professional bodies, and that it should command broad support wherever possible. A working group has been established to develop proposals, but for reasons of size has not been designed to be representative of the various groups. A forum will be held before publication to ensure that stakeholder groups and others have a formal opportunity to consider possible proposals and contribute their views. The department has already had submissions from a number of professional organisations, and others are of course welcome to write with theirs. Whether or not there is formal consultation on the action plan or elements of it will depend on the nature of the measures.

Health: Audiology

Lord Turnberg: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What consideration has been given to the maintenance of specialist audiology services within the National Health Service in plans to contract out audiology services to private providers; and
	What estimates have been made of the proportion of deaf people able to benefit from a hearing aid who have received such an aid.

Lord Warner: Information on the number of deaf people able to benefit from a hearing aid who have received such an aid is not held centrally.
	A national action plan for audiology will be published in early 2007. The action plan will be aimed at improving access and reducing waiting times through a strategic improvement approach for the service. A working group is currently developing proposals for the audiology action plan. It will consider all the services that audiology departments provide, including specialist audiology services. In addition to the development of the action plan, the department has announced the procurement of up to 300,000 audiology pathways to provide assessment, fitting and follow-up. Both these measures will assist in significantly reducing waiting times and will greatly benefit those who receive hearing aids.

Health: Regulation of Psychologists

Lord Walton of Detchant: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is their assessment of the extent to which their proposal to place the regulation of the psychological professions under the Health Professions Council will be more successful than the proposal by nine professional bodies representing psychologists to establish a psychological professions council.

Lord Warner: The Government set out their proposals for the statutory regulation of applied psychologists in their March 2005 public consultation document, Applied Psychology—Enhancing Public Protection: Proposals for the Statutory Regulation of Applied Psychologists. More recently, the department held a four-month period of consultation on our proposals to reform the regulation of medical and non-medical healthcare professionals, following the recommendations made by Sir Liam Donaldson and the advisory group headed by Andrew Foster earlier this year. This consultation ended on 10 November 2006. We are now considering the way forward in the light of responses and the Government's policy objectives. We expect to publish our proposals shortly.

Health: Sport and Exercise Medicine Doctors

Earl Howe: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Which of the first 16 sport and exercise medicine doctors recognised by the Department of Health have been contracted by Olympic governing bodies of sport.

Lord Davies of Oldham: At present there are three doctors in the United Kingdom who have formal recognition and a certificate of specialist training from the Faculty of Sport and Exercise Medicine. This new faculty is recognised by the Department of Health as the official route of approval and accreditation in sport and exercise medicine, and those approved by the new faculty are then registered on the General Medical Council's specialist register. The faculty will be increasing the number of fully accredited doctors over the next few years.
	Separately, the English Institute of Sport, which receives lottery funding from UK Sport, currently employs 16 doctors. These doctors specialise in sport medicine. One of these doctors is on the specialist register. All the other doctors are in the process of undergoing assessment to be included on the specialist register. Of the 16 doctors employed by the institute, 11 have contractual arrangements with Olympic governing bodies of sport, including the one doctor on the register. The Olympic governing bodies of sport all have doctors contracted to them, although these contractual arrangements vary considerably.

Immigration: Unaccompanied Children

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many unaccompanied children arrived in England and Wales, for whom an asylum claim has been made, in each quarter or month of the last two years for which figures are available; and which were the principal countries from which they came.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Asylum seekers apply to be granted refugee status in the UK rather than specifically in England, Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland. Asylum applications data are not available at regional level.
	Information on unaccompanied asylum-seeking children is published quarterly and annually. Copies of these publications and others relating to general immigration to the UK are available from the Library of the House and from the Home Office Research Development and Statistics Directorate website at http://www. homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigration1.html.

Immigration: Unaccompanied Children

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the care and education of unaccompanied children, granted asylum or long-term leave to remain, are a national responsibility.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Support of unaccompanied asylum-seeking children is the statutory responsibility of local authorities, but central government funding from both the Department for Education and Skills and the Home Office is available for this purpose.

Iraq: British Consulate

Lord Clement-Jones: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether suitable premises have been identified for the British consulate in Erbil, Iraq; and, if so, which premises have been identified.

Lord Triesman: Foreign and Commonwealth Office officials are currently reviewing plans for the future status of our consulate in Kirkuk. One of the options under consideration is to move to Erbil.

NHS: Compensation

Lord Walton of Detchant: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What has been the total compensation paid to patients and families in the past five years as a result of litigation against National Health Service obstetricians alleging brain damage during pregnancy or parturition resulting from negligent clinical care.

Lord Warner: It is not possible to differentiate claims made against obstetricians and midwife-led teams. The table shows the payments in the past five years for all claims where the injury was either brain damage or cerebral palsy.
	
		
			 Payments made over the past five years on obstetrics, obstetrics/gynaecology, community midwifery and antenatal clinic claims where the injury was either brain damage or cerebral palsy 
			 Payment Year Compensation 
			 2001-02 320,447,750 
			 2002-03 174,476,205 
			 2003-04 105,608,870 
			 2004-05 173,148,369 
			 2005-06 188,792,357 
			 Total 962,473,551 
			 Note: In 2001-02, claims under the clinical negligence scheme for trusts were centralised and payments include reimbursements to trusts for interim amounts made on cases not yet resolved.

Olympic Games 2012: Budget

Lord Luke: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, following their objective to deliver the London Olympic Games on an all-party basis, they intend to agree all aspects of the overall budget for the London 2012 Olympic Games with representatives from the Conservative and Liberal Democrat parties.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The Government welcome the all-party support for the Olympic Games and will continue to share information about the delivery of the Games on an all-party basis. The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport has given an undertaking to continue to keep Parliament informed about Olympic costs and to report as necessary on the budget.

Palace of Westminster: Post

Lord Norton of Louth: asked the Chairman of Committees:
	What was the total number of items of post received in the Palace of Westminster in 2005; and what proportion was received in each of the two Houses.

Lord Brabazon of Tara: Prior to the introduction of systematic screening of the post received in the Palace of Westminster, no accurate figures were kept for the volume of post. Since the introduction of this screening system in January 2006, the volume of post received has been as follows.
	
		
			 January 377,468 
			 February 456,159 
			 March 509,709 
			 April 402,208 
			 May 452,238 
			 June 423,505 
			 July 382,171 
			 August 260,055 
			 September 338,823 
			 October 383,248 
		
	
	Royal Mail estimates that recipients in the House of Lords account for 20 per cent of the total volume. The remaining 80 per cent of the post is destined for recipients in the House of Commons.

Pensions: Richardsons Fertilisers

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will propose policy changes as a result of the collapse of the Richardsons Fertilisers pension scheme.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: We do not propose any policy changes as a result of the collapse of the Richardsons Fertilisers pension scheme.

Prisons: Operational Management

Lord Ramsbotham: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Following the abolition of the Office for Contracted Prisons, who is responsible for the direct operational management of each of the private sector prisons containing adult prisoners.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The operational management of contracted sector prisons has always been the responsibility of the contractor for each of the 11 establishments. This has been the situation both prior to and following the closure of the Office for Contracted Prisons at the end of March 2006. The Home Office is responsible for contractual management, ensuring that contractors deliver the service as set out in the individual contracts. The chief executive of the National Offender Management Service is the ultimate authority for each contract. With the exception of HMP & YOI Ashfield, this is delegated to regional offender managers for the area where the prison is located. Within each of the contracted establishments is a Home Office controller whose task is to ensure adherence to the contract on a day-to-day basis and to take remedial action in the event of non-compliance. The Home Office controllers are line-managed through the regional offender manager. The attached table lists contracted adult establishments and their respective regional offender managers.
	
		
			 Establishment Region Regional Offender Manager 
			 HMP Altcourse North-west Ms Liz Hill 
			 HMP Bronzefield South-east Mrs Sarah Payne 
			 HMP & YOI Doncaster Yorkshire and Humberside Mr Paul Wilson 
			 HMP Dovegate West Midlands Mr Steve Goode 
			 HMP Forest Bank North-west Ms Liz Hill 
			 HMP Lowdham Grange East Midlands Ms Linda Jones 
			 HMP & YOI Parc Offender Management Service Wales Ms Sian West 
			 HMP Peterborough East of England Mr Trevor Williams 
			 HMP Rye Hill East Midlands Ms Linda Jones 
			 HMP Wolds Yorkshire and Humberside Mr Paul Wilson

Prisons: Operational Management

Lord Ramsbotham: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Following the abolition of the Office for Contracted Prisons, what direct operational responsibility the director-general of the Prison Service has for private sector prisons.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The director-general of HM Prison Service has no direct operational responsibility for contracted-sector prisons, although some elements of policy work from HMPS directly impact on the contracted sector.

Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005: Designation of Land

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What area of land has so far been designated or protected under Sections 128 to 138 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: On 1 April 2006, a designation order (SI 2005/3447) made on behalf of the Secretary of State for Defence came into effect designating the following MoD sites as protected sites under Sections 128 and 129 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005: Her Majesty's Naval Base Clyde, Royal Naval Armaments Depot Coulport, Northwood Headquarters, RAF Fylingdales, RAF Menwith Hill, RAF Croughton, RAF Lakenheath, RAF Feltwell, RAF Mildenhall, RAF Brize Norton, Sea Mounting Centre Marchwood, RAF Fairford and RAF Welford.
	On 13 April 2006, following amendments made to Sections 128 and 129 by Section 12 of the Terrorism Act 2006, all licensed nuclear sites also became protected sites. An order defining a designated area under Section 138 was laid before Parliament on 10 June 2005 (SI 2005/1537). A map is available at http://www.met.police.uk/publicorder/protest_march.htm.

Sport: Anti-doping

Lord Luke: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Who are the members of the security panel responsible for monitoring UK Sport's national anti-doping organisation for elite sport; on which dates they have met; and when their reports are due to be placed in the Library of the House.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The Independent Anti-Doping Scrutiny Panel was set up in September 2005 and is focused specifically on scrutinising the potential for conflicts of interest in relation to the performance of the anti-doping function within UK Sport. The panel is chaired by David Kenworthy, the former chief constable of North Yorkshire Police. The other members of the panel are:
	Nerys Williams, head of the Health and Safety Executive's Employment Medical Advisory Service;Mark Emerton, former Royal Navy commander and member of the Criminal Cases Review Commission;Trevor Rothwell, former director of Huntingdon Forensic Science Service laboratory; andGillian Ekins, solicitor.
	To date the panel has met on:
	30 September 2005;
	9 November 2005;
	2 December 2005;
	8 February 2006;
	15 March 2006;
	11 May 2006;
	26 July 2006;
	6 September 2006;
	1 November 2006; and
	29 November 2006.
	Under its terms of reference, the scrutiny panel will produce an annual report, which will be sent to the Minister for Sport and the chair of UK Sport. The panel expects to produce its first report in December 2006 and copies of this document will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

Sport: English Institute of Sport

Lord Luke: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have agreed performance measures for the English Institute of Sport; if so, when these were last reviewed; and whether they will place a copy of their findings in the Library of the House.

Lord Davies of Oldham: UK Sport assumed responsibility from Sport England for the English Institute of Sport (EIS) on 1 April 2006. To date, performance measures for the EIS have not been agreed between DCMS and UK Sport. However, in line with the funding agreement 2005-08, target outcomes and performance measures for EIS will be determined by the end of this calendar year.

Sport: UK Sport Performance Targets

Lord Luke: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What are the annual performance targets set out in the funding agreement between UK Sport and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport; when these targets were last reviewed; and when they expect to publish the results achieved by UK Sport.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The funding agreement for the period 2005-08 between UK Sport and DCMS is available on UK Sport's website at www.uksport.gov.uk/pages/corporate_publications/. DCMS and UK Sport meet on a quarterly basis primarily to measure progress against the targets set out in the agreement. The most recent meeting took place on 17 October. Details of UK Sport's annual performance against the funding agreement targets will be published in UK Sport's annual review, which is required to be laid before Parliament before the end of October 2007.

Stone of Destiny

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In what circumstances the Stone of Destiny would return to London for ceremonial purposes; and whether there are any plans for such a return.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The Stone of Destiny will return to London for the next coronation, after which it will be returned to Scotland.

Tourism: Indian Visitors

Lord Rana: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many tourists with Indian passports visited the United Kingdom in 2005; and how many tourists from India visited Northern Ireland in this period.

Lord Davies of Oldham: There were 332,000 tourist visits by Indian passport holders and 272,000 tourist visits by Indian residents to the UK in 2005. The data were obtained from the International Passenger Survey, which is a sample survey, so the results are subject to sampling error. Data for Northern Ireland have not been provided, because sample sizes are too small. VisitBritain expects visits from India to increase significantly in future years and regards India as a priority emerging market for its overseas activities in promoting inbound tourism to the UK.

Vehicles: Weight Restrictions

Lord Bradshaw: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Baroness Scotland of Asthal on 23 November (WA 19), what evidence the fixed penalty procedures working group has taken on (a) the number and frequency of, and (b) the cost of enforcement of, weight restrictions offences; and what comparison the working group has made of the fixed penalty for ignoring weight restrictions with more recent fixed penalties such as the £80 fixed penalty for anti-social behaviour.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The fixed-penalty procedures working group has not taken such evidence. In reviewing the level of fixed penalties, the group normally considers relevant factors that might justify an across-the-board increase in the level of the standard fixed penalties and the small number of non-standard fixed penalties. It would not be practical to review individually the level of every fixed penalty.
	The group has to date received no representation proposing an increase in the fixed-penalty level for failing to comply with a statutory weight restriction.

Young Offender Institutions: Ashfield

Lord Carlile of Berriew: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	On how many occasions physical restraint was used at Ashfield young offender institution on, respectively, male and female clients during each of the 12 months prior to 1 November; and
	On how many occasions physical restraint occurred at Ashfield young offender institution in relation to, respectively, male and female black and ethnic- minority clients during each of the 12 months prior to 1 November; and
	On how many occasions strip-searching involving physical restraint occurred at Ashfield young offender institution in relation to, respectively, male and female clients during each of the 12 months prior to 1 November.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The attached table lists the number of incidents where physical restraint was used at HMP & YOI Ashfield during the months November 2005 through to October 2006. Also included are figures for the number of black and minority-ethnic (BME) boys subject to physical restraint. The prison does not strip-search boys under physical restraint. Ashfield is a juvenile establishment that accommodates only males.
	
		
			 HMP & YOI Ashfield: use of physical restraint November 2005 to October 2006 
			 Month Incidents where physical restraint is used Black and minority ethnic prisoners involved in physical restraint Full searching (strip-searching) involving physical restraint 
			 November 2005 52 10 0 
			 December 2005 30 3 0 
			 January 2006 48 11 0 
			 February 2006 34 8 0 
			 March 2006 30 4 0 
			 April 2006 27 10 0 
			 May 2006 42 6 0 
			 June 2006 31 2 0 
			 July 2006 40 5 0 
			 August 2006 51 11 0 
			 September 2006 38 12 0 
			 October 2006 52 4 0 
			 Total 475 86 0

Young Offender Institutions: Ashfield

Lord Ramsbotham: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Following the abolition of the Office for Contracted Prisons, who is responsible for the direct operational management of the juveniles and young offenders in HM Young Offender Institution Ashfield.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The operational management of HMP & YOI Ashfield has always been the responsibility of Serco, the company holding the contract. This has been the situation both prior to and following the closure of the Office for Contracted Prisons at the end of March 2006. The Home Office is responsible for contractual management, ensuring that Serco delivers the service as set out in the contract. The chief executive of the National Offender Management Service is the ultimate authority for the contract. For HMP & YOI Ashfield, this is delegated to the head of the commissioner's support bureau, which is part of NOMS. In fulfilling this task, the bureau works closely with the Youth Justice Board in identifying its requirements as the customer for Ashfield's services.
	As with all contracted establishments, there is a Home Office controller at Ashfield whose role is to ensure adherence to the contract on a day-to-day basis and to take remedial action in the event of non-compliance. The Home Office controller at Ashfield is line-managed through the head of the commissioner's support bureau.

Young Offender Institutions

Lord Carlile of Berriew: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	On how many occasions physical restraint was used at Brinsford young offender institution on, respectively, male and female clients during each of the 12 months prior to 1 November; and
	On how many occasions physical restraint was used at Castington young offender institution on, respectively, male and female clients during each of the 12 months prior to 1 November; and
	On how many occasions physical restraint was used at Feltham young offender institution on, respectively, male and female clients during each of the 12 months prior to 1 November; and
	On how many occasions physical restraint was used at Hindley young offender institution on, respectively, male and female clients during each of the 12 months prior to 1 November; and
	On how many occasions physical restraint was used at Huntercombe young offender institution on, respectively, male and female clients during each of the 12 months prior to 1 November; and
	On how many occasions physical restraint was used at Lancaster Farms young offender institution on, respectively, male and female clients during each of the 12 months prior to 1 November; and
	On how many occasions physical restraint was used at Stoke Heath young offender institution on, respectively, male and female clients during each of the 12 months prior to 1 November; and
	On how many occasions physical restraint was used at Thorn Cross young offender institution on, respectively, male and female clients during each of the 12 months prior to 1 November; and
	On how many occasions physical restraint was used at Warren Hill young offender institution on, respectively, male and female clients during each of the 12 months prior to 1 November.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The following table shows the number of times approved control and restraint techniques were used, in addition to other incidents where use of force was applied, in the 12 months prior to 1 November. All the establishments hold male young offenders only.
	
		
			 Date (HL488) Brinsford (HL489) Castington (HL490) Feltham (HL491) Hindley (HL492) Lancaster Farms 
			 November 2005 22 29 100 40 44 
			 December 2005 28 25 69 31 48 
			 January 2006 24 22 75 37 41 
			 February 2006 23 43 78 36 48 
			 March 2006 19 28 98 40 25 
			 April 2006 19 27 61 37 23 
			 May 2006 25 19 110 44 39 
			 June 2006 17 25 81 41 48 
			 July 2006 15 39 82 52 32 
			 August 2006 16 34 76 41 35 
			 September 2006 18 33 58 46 35 
			 October 2006 19 41 70 40 28 
			 Total 245 365 958 485 446 
		
	
	
		
			 Date (HL493) Huntercombe (HL494) Stoke Heath (HL495) Thorn Cross (HL496) Warren Hill 
			 November 2005 43 37 1 16 
			 December 2005 46 59 0 11 
			 January 2006 68 62 0 10 
			 February 2006 18 60 0 10 
			 March 2006 29 56 4 13 
			 April 2006 45 40 0 7 
			 May 2006 46 45 1 21 
			 June 2006 34 62 0 14 
			 July 2006 41 42 0 21 
			 August 2006 44 62 0 7 
			 September 2006 29 41 1 13 
			 October 2006 26 31 1 16 
			 Total 469 597 8 159